tv [untitled] January 3, 2012 8:31pm-9:01pm PST
our numbers are folded into the city wide financial report. the audit is selected by the comptroller by charter. it includes our financial audit as well as a single audit. we also get a management letter each year, in terms of findings. i am pleased to report we have no findings, so that is quite an achievement. this is what the picture looked like between 2009 and 2011. we had a $127 million increase in net assets. the majority of that was in the revenue side of the house. we saw a $23 million increase in operating revenues, another $19 million in non-operating revenues, mostly from getting a grant in 2011 which we did not have in 2010. we saw that $66 million increase in capital contributions, mostly due to the aara grant, and an
increase in our general fund transport. we saw a slight increase in administrative costs, as a result of revenue expenditures increasing by $123 million in two years. our balance sheet -- once again, we recorded about a $144 million increase in total assets, the majority in higher revenues and the capital assets because of the [unintelligible] we sought a slight increase because most of the funds were used in the prior fiscal years. we saw a slight increase in debt service. we saw a $25 million increase in non-current liability, mostly due to pension and benefit costs, and a $6 million decrease in state grants.
our net assets and liabilities -- $127 million. that is a quick summary of what the numbers look like. i would like to introduce you to tiffany rasmussen, the audit coordinator, who will go to the audit from their perspective. >> good afternoon. you have a presentation that is five pages long, but i would like to cut to the headline. we issued an unqualified or clean opinion on the june 30, 2011 financial statements. we did that on october 28, 2011. in my experience with mta, which goes back to 2000, that is the earliest ever. i must say it was a tremendous team effort. the controller's office and the whole team in the finance group worked very closely together and we made it happen. now we have made that happen and
the office said it will try to go earlier next year. be careful what you accomplish. [laughter] a great audit. i think the management team and staff. it was a very smooth audit. it met deadlines. the statement has been issued. the single audit will be issued this month, which is also earlier than it has ever been accomplished before. a lot of good things this fiscal year. i will entertain any questions you might have. chairperson nolan: thank you very much. >> no one from the public has an interest in addressing you on this matter. moving on, item 12, approving the strategic plan which represents the vision mission statement, goals, and objectives for the agency. chairperson nolan: thank you, director bridges, for your willingness to serve on the overview committee. you bring a lot of experience to
this. and i notice our treasurer. thank you all. executive director reiskin: thank you, chair person. i should mention a was apparently remiss in not providing an update on the church and bose construction update, which was on the agenda. chairperson nolan: i did not mean to suggest you were remiss. executive director reiskin: it was an error and i was remiss. it did not take long. the reason i did not have a report is there is no change since the last report. the project is on track. i will bring you a real update at the next meeting. on track, so to speak. moving to the strategic plan, this has been before you a number of times before. we went into it in depth in our november workshop and got a lot of great feedback from you. we are very proud and pleased to
be bringing for your consideration final approval and adoption of the plan. before i have a brief presentation to work through -- before i do, i want to acknowledge some of the staff who have been leading the charge on this. it has been a lot of people inside and outside the agency working on this, but a core group drove it to where it is today. i do want to acknowledge ann fritzler, christopher, patricia, and others, all under the leadership of papandreou. a phenomenal effort to pull together complex ideas for a complex organization into what i think is an elegant and straightforward format. we have put the entire plan up on the website. i am not going to go through the entire plan. there is a lot of narrative and
text that supports the core elements of it, which you have reviewed before. if somebody can do the slides, i just want to quickly walk through to give you in the public an update of where we landed on the plan. while tim is getting this up and running, what i wanted to say is one of the first things i would have done coming into this job would be to start a strategic planning process, because i think having a plan to guide where we are going, everybody working off the same sheet of paper, going the same direction, is incredibly important. i was happy to find you have already started that process.
tim already had it under way. it is great we are at this point and will be able to kick off the next fiscal year with i think a very clear direction. the presentation is not on there? ok. i guess what the main points that i wanted to convey today -- first, an update. we got a lot of feedback from you. we got feedback from a lot of stakeholders, much of which we were able to incorporate into the strategic plan. we have a complete document today that includes not just vision, mission, goals, and objectives, but he performance indicators and targets for those indicators that will encompass the whole strategic plan, along with a supporting narrative. what we are aiming to do today
is seek approval and adoption of the plan. in the next five or six months, we would flesh out the actions needed under each of the objectives in order to accomplish each objective, which in turn enables us to accomplish each goal, and developing a complete set of measures. what we have in the document our performance indicators. it is not an exhaustive list, just key things we would focus on. we showed you a draft in november. they have been refined somewhat through what we received. to restate it, the vision that we are proposing for the mta -- san francisco, great city, excellent transportation choices, and a simple, straightforward vision that accomplishes -- encompasses a
lot of where we want to be, without using a lot of words. the mission statement is more or less as it has been before. we work together to plan, build, operate, regulate, and maintain the transportation network with our partners to connect communities. the work together part is important, both within the agency and the government, with our other stakeholders. the fact that we do it with our partners, such as regional and community, state, and business partners -- we are connected. some key phrases that speak to what we do to speak to the staff to move us forward. moving on, the four goals -- these are more or less as you saw them before. the first goal is to make sure
the system is safe. the second goal is really to make transit first work. the third goal is to make the city a better place. the fourth goal is to improve the organization itself in order to achieve the other three goals. taking a lot of work his agency does, breaking it down to what we believe are straightforward, understandable, accomplish a bold goals -- accomplishable goals. we have a short list of objectives under each goal. with each of these objectives, we have identified a key performance measure and targets for each fiscal cycle in those. under the safety goal, the objectives are improving security for system users, such
as reducing crime on a muni, improving workplace safety, and improving some of the collisions and accidents we hear about. those are the three legs of the safety stool. gold to is basically the transit first policy -- goal two is basically the transit first policy, improving customer service and communications, improving the performance of muni, which will get more people to use it. increase the use of all other non-private modes of transportation, which is the balance of the transit first policy. it is not a transit only policy. it is transit first. we use the other modes to reduce the amount of troops people need and want to use their own cars for. related to that is to make parking work, to continue
optimizing parking to manage the demand so it works for transit. that is the transit first goal. improving the city goal, we see a larger role we can play in the city in terms of its environmental performance, which is really the first objective, the direct impact on the economy, which is the second objective, the use of resources. we want to be a well-run organization as part of the city family and fabric. we want to be able to deliver our services efficiently, because transportation is so important in san francisco. it directly impact the quality of life here. finally, i made reference to the revenue or budget panel earlier, to reduce our capital and operating structural deficits. if we do not address them, we will not be able to achieve
much. finally, the fourth goal is really the inward-looking girl. we need to strengthen and support -- strengthen the agency and support the employees to make any of this happened. we have an objective to improve internal communication, to make the workplace environment more collaborative and innovative, and inclusive. to improve accountability of our employees. this plan will serve as foundation of accountability for the entire organization, down to individuals. finally, to improve partnerships with the stakeholders who rely on us and on whom we rely. that is a nut shell of the strategic plan, in large part as you saw it before. we took your feedback and that of others, which made it a better plan. we have a resolution for your
consideration that would adopt the plan. with that, i would be happy to take any questions. chairperson nolan: members of the board? >> in the deliberations, there were creative people. i assume there were controversies about what should wind up in here? are there any in particular that you would care to talk about? maybe would not care to talk about them, but are there any? executive director reiskin: there was a lot of feedback, not all of which we were able to incorporate. the controversy -- tim want to jump in. some had to do with the level of the specificity, and whether we wanted to get more specific and be more explicit in terms of cycling and pedestrian goals. that was one area i would say was somewhat controversial. we are trying in this plan to
set the frame and not pick the winners. i think there were definitely differences of opinion on that. there were differences of opinion in the order of the goals. we ended up sticking safety first, making sure people feel safe on the system. everything else is secondary. other people thought transit first should be first, or the organization should be first. there was slight disagreement. i think we kept the plan at a high enough level where it did not really beg all the tough policy questions that implementing the plan will. you may be said it in your written remarks on the plan. it is going to be to the mta management and board to back implementation of the plan. there will be things we will do that we will be bringing to you, i imagine, under the framework
of this plan, that will not be popular and that will be controversial. it would want to achieve what we want to, we need to support that direction, even though not everybody may like it when it is first brought forward. i do not know if tim wants to add anything in terms of controversial issues. >> there were no controversies. [laughter] chairperson nolan: thank you. i assumed with creative people like you have here, sometimes there are differences of opinion, which is fine. to me, the high-level thing is exactly what is strategic plan ought to be, the goals. anything else? thank you. we have a speaker? >> yes. bob has expressed a desire to address the board on this matter. chairperson nolan: good
afternoon. happy new year. >> i am bob planthold. i wanted to come to positively make a statement of support and request that you endorse this. it is not just the content i agree with and support. it is also the process by which this was made. that process itself generates respect and credibility. there was a widespread outrage through stakeholder workshops and interviews. that inclusiveness and diversity was helpful. the waste of responded as facilitators was also refreshen -- the way staff responded as facilitators was also refresh ing. they listened to what we said. the process was hopeful. the content i agree with. this is well written and understandable. that is helpful for the general public.
i thought it worth saying that. there are people who really read this and say yes. chairperson nolan: thank you. good afternoon. >> good afternoon. herbert weiner, a former member of rescue muni. the strategic objectives are commendable, but you left one important thing out. the expansion of resources to meet changing needs. part of the psychology of the mta is to make do with what resources you have and not ask for more. we need more drivers. we need more buses. this should be part of the strategic plan. this is left out. one example of this is the transit effectiveness project. it really neglect the needs of the elderly, sick, and chronically ill and physically
vulnerable. this strategic plan have to address this. right now, what you are trying to do is get the most buses on the most utilized runs, but you are leaving many people who are very needy in the lurch. this plan has to address that. i mean, i certainly -- i take real issue with the objectives. you have to start expanding reasonably. this is very important. if you want to make this a transit first city and have people use cars less, you have to expand these resources. chairperson nolan: would anyone else care to address the board on this? seeing no one, we have a resolution before us. >> motion to approve, with great pleasure. i know the board has put a lot of time into this, but that is nothing compared to staff. we appreciate the hard work on a
great plan. our silence on the board recognizes the hard work we have done and you have done, and is not dismiss a of it. i know a lot of work has gone into this. i appreciate it. that is a long ocean. >> i will second with one sentence. we had a detailed discussion at our retreat. it is obvious you listened carefully to us, and i appreciate that. along the same lines as director brinkman, my quiet does not suggest this pleasure. quite the contrary. chairperson nolan: all in favor? the ayes have it. a member of this board a few years ago -- this built upon worksheet and the committee did. thank you. >> item 13, approving the 20
year capital plan. no one has expressed interest in addressing you on this matter. chairperson nolan: mr. papandreou, you have been dying to talk to us. >> i appreciate that. good afternoon, board and director. i am going to present fairly quickly the 20 year capital plan. some of its key components and its relationship to other documents. what you have before you is in the appendix, a list of our 20 year unconstrained needs. this is an unconstrained need, not a physically-constrained need. it is what we would need in the next 20 years to make our system work more effectively. we also have determined that through this new process we have developed, called the
transportation capital committed, it allows the different divisional entities within the mta to have a voice in developing the process. we used to have separate capital planning process, and now we have one for all the different modes of the agency. while that may not be very interesting, it is pretty huge for where the agency is going. on the actual transportation capital programs themselves, we worked on a new way of looking at how we are going to look at our project. we have structured it in a way that has major progress categories. it has been quite an effective tool to help us organize how we look at our project and how we organize them now. certain projects will fall under multiple categories, as they do underfunding, but we need organization which allows us to get to these pieces. these are criteria we developed
by looking at the existing policies in san francisco, but also regional, state, and federal government. we asked the team to waive those criteria. -- weigh those criteria. we have better ways to integrate the project and meet the needs of the better streets plan and other elements that have come forward. what used to be stand-alone projects, rail or pedestrian projects, now have the opportunity to be more multi- modal and integrated. we expect to see cost and time savings, getting better at using our resources. the capital planning context, as i was mentioning, is the process of integrating the various and you will see there, the
director just presented the strategic plan. these longer-range plans help the other plants, and more specifically, the capital plan itself really gives us the universe of projects that will happen over the next 20 years, and then the capital improvement program that will come back to you, this is our work plan. these are our priorities. more recent than that is the capital budget. the next two years, we are going to build x. we promised to build x. we have the resources to build what we say we are going to build, so over the next month, we will come back to you to approve the various components men made up to the ultimate approval of the budget.
just to give you some background, when we are looking at the project and 20 years ahead, this was a state of good repair. the state of good repair also ties into reliability and to safety and helping to keep out costs. so it is a fairly large buckets, and then there were other categories for security and the end enhancements and expansion. i will talk about that. in summary, the project itself has a 183 actual projects. in total, we and somewhere in the order of 1000 projects that
the agency is agreeing to do. it will be really busy. we have a lot of things to do. the capital needs bimotor, when you look at it from a motor oil perspective, -- the capital needs by mode, when you look at it from day -- a modal perspective, we have basically done a rough order of magnitude analysis and found we need about $24 billion to meet our capital program needs between now and 2030. obviously, this is a wish list. after the process, we have to figure out what we have.
and the idea is to look at strategically expand in the corridors that we need to. we also will be experiencing a latent demand. also, there will be an impact on capacity. and this one we have done more in detail because of the relationship and of the projects we have been working on. the majority of our work is really making sure our actual transit fleet system is working to the best that they can. we also have a need for the other facility components, including parking and traffic, but beat primary is the system. -- but the primary is the system.
this is very important to us, so we are working closely with state and regional and other partners to make sure that this does not impinge on what we have. and then there is the central subway. there are other corridors that we're working on. doing better that we have, they will be instrumental, focusing on the networks there are the projects we have been talking about.
and that is in a nutshell. we are looking to complete and there are the funding opportunities that we expect to see, and then to get this ready for the two-year budget. i gave you a very high-level presentation, and i would be happy to answer any questions. i would be remiss not to introduce the people have been instrumental in gathering the information. it is quite a challenge so i want to thank them. chairman nolan: thank you. this is the easy part here. we do not have to worry about money. >> that is right. chairmon nolan -- chairm